Modifying the built-in Uyghur-detection algorithms to instead detect Palestinians was probably conveniently easy
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
46 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37724 readers
520 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The issue, to be clear, is not who makes the surveillance cameras. It's the surveillance cameras being installed in the first place.
Alarmism about Chinese surveillance cameras is missing the forest for the trees.
Dahua and Hikvision are deployed everywhere because they are high quality and low cost. It poses an interesting dilemma (extending beyond cameras) for the U.S. and allies trying to break dependence on vendors under partial ownership and alleged control of the government in China. Should we subsidize domestic vendors to tilt the scale? Simply banning the high quality low cost option doesn't seem to accomplish much.
Simply banning the high quality low cost option doesn’t seem to accomplish much.
This is not about quality and costs, but about Chinese forced labour (which is a major reason why it's so cheap), human rights, security as the Chinese government pursue a dictatorial policy.
This is not about quality and costs
It is about quality and cost for the majority of purchasers that worry about meeting a budget. Virtually anybody making purchase decisions on some sort of surveillance system will grapple with that issue. My point is that we all tend to want the best performance for the least cost, and breaking that habit for the less tangible purposes of domestic security or human rights somewhere else is why we will continue to see these articles about Hikvision/Dahua cameras getting deployed at times and in places they probably shouldn't.
Should we subsidize domestic vendors to tilt the scale?
I think maybe the state shouldn't spy on people.